search for: virtio_xxx_phi

On Mon, Apr 20, 2015 at 09:10:02PM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > > > On 20/04/2015 19:36, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > At the implementation level, there's one big issue you seem to have > > missed: DMA to invalid memory addresses causes a crash in memory core. > > I'm not sure whether it makes sense to recover from virtio core bugs > > when we can't

On Mon, Apr 20, 2015 at 09:10:02PM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > > > On 20/04/2015 19:36, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > At the implementation level, there's one big issue you seem to have > > missed: DMA to invalid memory addresses causes a crash in memory core. > > I'm not sure whether it makes sense to recover from virtio core bugs > > when we can't

On 20/04/2015 22:34, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > On Mon, Apr 20, 2015 at 09:10:02PM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote: >> >> >> On 20/04/2015 19:36, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: >>> At the implementation level, there's one big issue you seem to have >>> missed: DMA to invalid memory addresses causes a crash in memory core. >>> I'm not sure whether it

On Fri, Apr 17, 2015 at 03:59:15PM +0800, Fam Zheng wrote: > Currently, virtio code chooses to kill QEMU if the guest passes any invalid > data with vring. > That has drawbacks such as losing unsaved data (e.g. when > guest user is writing a very long email), or possible denial of service in > a nested vm use case where virtio device is passed through. > > virtio-1 has

On Fri, Apr 17, 2015 at 03:59:15PM +0800, Fam Zheng wrote: > Currently, virtio code chooses to kill QEMU if the guest passes any invalid > data with vring. > That has drawbacks such as losing unsaved data (e.g. when > guest user is writing a very long email), or possible denial of service in > a nested vm use case where virtio device is passed through. > > virtio-1 has